To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

PAGE 6 THE POINT NEWS March 9, 1971
Myerberg on
Drugs
On February 25th, Lawyer
Neal Myerberg spoke on drugs and
the law. This was under the
sponsorship of the drug
information program.
Mr. Myerberg began by saying
that he was looking at the drug
issue from the point of handling
drug cases and not as a drug user.
He said that the worst part in
handling drug cases was seeing
kids get busted because he could
not do much about it. He said
that even if the lawyer argues with
the judge that this is the person’s
first offense, the penalty is still
two years. He then stated that
“Most of the drug laws passed by
congress do not affect the
individual drug user.” Most of the
laws affecting individuals are state
laws. He pointed out that before
July 1, 1970, everything in
Maryland was two years and no
less. This penalty applied to
marijuana and hard drugs. Now,
however, possession of marijuana
in Maryland is a misdemeanor
with a penalty of one year and the
possibility of probation. But if
you give the drug to someone else,
you can be arrested for possession
and resale, which is a felony.
You cannot be arrested for a
mesdemeanor unless the police are
present, or if a warrent is used.
However, for a felony, one can be
arrested if the police believe and
have proof that the felony has
been committed.
It was stated that you can be
arrested if drugs are near you even
though you have no intent of
using them. He sited a case. Two
men were playing dise in an alley
and a bag containing drugs was in
the corner of the alley. The police
saw the men and arrested them
for'possession of drugs. He stated
that someoneated that someone
charged for possession of
marijuana as a first offense, is
entitled to probation in Maryland.
He said that each court can make
its own decision on a drug case,
and each county is allowed to
make a different decision.
Next he covered drugs and
their relationship to the federal
law. He said that the first law
concerning drugs went back to
1937 when Mayor Fiorello
Laguardia of New York had a law
passed that anyone possessing
marijuana must possess a tax
stamp. Mr. Myerberg wondered
who would have a tax stamp for
something which violates the law.
He said that as a new drug comes
into use, a law is passed against it.
He then explained the
differences between a felony and
a misdemeanor. He said that a
felony goes back to English
common law, and is punishable
either by imprisonment or death.
If a person commits a felony he is
unable to vote, obtain a passport,
and testify in court. He said that a
misdemeanor is anything that is
not a felony, but it still results in
a criminal record. With a
misdemeanor the rites of
citizenship lost for a felony do
not apply. He also said that if you
are arrested on a drug charge, you
are not wanted by the military.
Next, he covered some aspects
of drug treatment. In the 1950’s
those who were rehabilitated for
durgs were sent to the U.S. Public
Health Hsopital at Lexington,
Kentucky. At that time not many
young people were effectively
rehabilitated. They stayed at the
hospital for six weeks and then
sent home. The ones who were
considered drug addicts and were
supposedly rehabilitated, were the
older people. More often than
not, their rehabilitation was short
lived.
Concerning the legality of
marijuana, the courts say that it is
not legal, and will not listen to the
argument that it hurts no one. He
explained that three United States
constitutional amendments relate
to drugs. These are the first,
fourth and fifth. The first relates
to drugs and their right in a
religious ceremony. He said that
an Indian tribe had been using
drugs in a ceremony for
sometime. When the case came to
court, the tribe had enough
backing to show what they used
had a proper place in the
ceremony. The court stated that
they had a right to use drugs.
However, when Timothy Leary
started a church in California, the
court held that he did not have
the legal right to sue drugs in a
religious ceremony. The fourth
amendment dealt with search and
seizure. He stated that no one can
be arrested without a warrent,
except where the crime is being
committed in the presence or view
of the arresting officer. He said
that if the police seek to search
you for drugs, they cannot do so
unless you let them. However,
once the search is permitted it
becomes valid. He said that if
your car is stopped for a traffic
violation, you can be searched for
a weapon, and the officer may
examine areas in his presence and
view. Also, if he wants to search
the car, you must give him
permission, unless the search is
incident to arrest.
If the police suspect drugs in
a dormitory room and one of the
occupants refuses, provided both
are present, the search is not valid.
However, if one of the parties is
not present, and the other
consents to the search, it becomes
valid. If the search takes place in
your home and in your room, its
validity depends upon your
permission. In Mr. Myerberg’s
opinion, “A person has use of his
constitutional rights, and that no
parent could go against their own
children concerning constitutional
amendments.”
He said that the fifth
amendment deals with a person’s
testifying against himself in court.
He said that a person does not
have to testify against himself if
he does not want to, and he does
not have to testify against other
people. A common statement is
that “ I do not wish to testify on
the grounds that it may
incriminate me.”
Concerning the stop and frisk
law, the officer can only search
your person, and only if he
believes that you are in possession
of a weapon concealed for use
against him.
He then mentioned that most
of the supreme court decisions do
not aid the criminal, and people
who feel so are mis-informed. He
said that most of the criminals in
such cases are retried and
reconvicted. He then mentioned
that the D.C. Crime Bill with its
no-knock provision, which means
that police can enter a place
without an identifying knock on
the door and begin searching
where they can show that the
evidence would otherwise be
TOEHOLD Need a Sympathetic Listener ?
A new service was initiated in
St. Mary’s County approximately
three weeks ago, known as
Operation Toehold. Toehold is a
telephone crisis intervention
program established mainly to
help the teenagers of St. Mary’s
County, but by no means is it
limited to one age group. The
program is sponsored by the Drug
Action Committee of St. Mary’s
County, although the calls
received have touched on a wide
range of subjects. Anyone in need
of help, in need of someone to
talk with should call Operation
Toehold at 863-4653. At present
the hours are from 6 p.m.- 12 a.m.
on Mondays - Thursdays, from 6
p.m. - after midnight on Fridays
and from 12 p.m. Saturday to
midnight Sunday. The goal is to
establish a 24 hour-a-day, 7 day a
week service.
The telephones at Toehold are
manned by volunteers. These
people are trained by a few
persons with professional
experience answering the phones
and are taught several rules they
must abide by to remain on the
phones. Rule number 1: ALL
CALLS ARE KEPT STRICTLY
CONFIDENTIAL. The “ training”
sessions are held every Tuesday
and Thursday night at 7 p.m at
the Felix Johnson Educational
Center across from Foodland and
Ben Franklin in Lexington Park.
Anyone interested in joining the
program is urged to attend these
meetings or to call Mr. Kreitzer at
863-8174. The program is
directed and manned by a group
of very concerned people; these
people care about others (they
show it by action not just talk.) If
you need help call. If you want to
help, go to one of the sessions.
The program needs the support
of the community.
Drug Rap By Moorman
Robert Moorman, a former
associate of Dr. Timothy Leary
and a drug dependent himself for
six years, will be speaking in St.
Mary’s Hall on March 10, at 8:30
p.m.
In 1961 Mr. Moorman went to
Cambridge, Mass., to begin his
college studies. It was there that
he was introduced to and started
using drugs, back when hippies
were called beatniks. It was not
long after he had started college
that Mr. Moorman “ dropped
out.”
During the next six years, Mr.
Moorman experimented with
marijuana (extensive use),
morphine and heroine (eight
months addiction), L.S.D. and
mescaline (four years off and on),
amphetamines (five years off and
on), solvents and glues (limited
use), romalar (limited use),
barbiturates (limited use), and
various assorted pills from time to
time.
The end of the road for the
ROBERT MOORMAN
a different view on drugs compared
to Myerberg
drug dependent Robert Moorman
came in 1966 when he was
arrested in Tampa, Florida for
grand larceny and possession of
narcotics. For fourteen months,
confined behind the fences of the
Florida State and County Prison
System, Robert Moorman began a
most painful and agonizing
rehabilitation.
After Mr. Moorman’s release
from prison, a whole new world
opened to him again, one that he
had not known for six long years.
For the past two years, Mr.
Moorman has lectured at high
schools, preparatory schools,
colleges and universities from
coast-to-coast. As in his previous
lectures, Mr. Moorman is expected
to bring to our community a
fresh, sincere and candid approach
to the mounting problem of drug
abuse.
There will be an informal rap
with Mr. Moorman at 3:00 p.m. in
the Guest Cottage.
destroyed, only applied to
Washington,D.C. and not to its
suburbs.
Mr. Myerberg stated that most
drug arrests occur through
informers. Most often the
informer is a good friend of the
person being arrested. If an
individual sells some “grass” to an
informer and he buys it, you can
be arrested for selling it to him.
You were not trapped by the
informer since you did not have
to sell him the bag, and he did not
have to buy it from you. The
theory relating to this case is the
entrapment theory and it does not
hold up in court.
Mr. Myerberg felt that the
older judges did not know how to
handle the drug problem
effectively. He said that the older
ones looked at drugs as a
punishment, and not from the
rehabilitative view. He felt that if
judges were between 30-35 years
of age, they would have a better
understanding of drugs and their
relationship to young people. He
explained that there are two latin
terms relating to drugs. One is
mala prohibita which means that
drugs are evil because they are
defined by soneone as evil; the
other is mala is which users in one
form or another in every
generation. He said that in this
generation heroine is sued as a
form of rebellion against
something but he did not say
what this something was. At this
point, Mr. Myerberg concluded his
talk, and a question and answer
period followed.
One question was concerned
with the possession of water
pipes, seringes, and other
paraphernalia, and the possibility
of arrest if the police suspect
drugs. Mr. Myerberg said that if
drugs are suspected that you can
be arrested.
A question arose concerning a
jury of one’s peers. Mr. Myerberg
felt that this should apply to
young people as well as to any
other group. He felt that a jury of
one’s peers would have a better
understanding of the situation, if
the peers were members of a
comparable socio-economic, age,
color, or religious group.
Concerning arrest warrants, Mr.
Myerberg felt that the warrant
must have a specific case, place,
and the name or names of the
individuals for the warrant.
Concerning arrest record, Mr.
Myerberg felt that arrest records
should not be kept running. That
is, if one has been arrested for a
previous of offenses but not
convicted, the arrest record
should be deleted and not be used
subsequently to establish any
prima facie case of criminal
tendency.
A question came up concerning
internal possession. Neal felt that
there was no law against it, but he
said that if a policeman saw you
popping pills for example, prior to
your swallowing them, you could
be arrested for possession of the
narcotics. He said that police dogs
are trained to sniff out drugs, and
they can be used to show
probable cause for arrest.
Another question was, “ If
police enter your room and you
throw the drugs out the window,
can you be arrested?” The answer
was, “ Yes, since there is usually a
policeman covering at ground
level and sees what is thrown out
the window.” “ If you are driving
another person’s car and you are
stopped and drugs are found, can
you be arrested?” Mr. Myerberg
was not sure, and it would depend
upon the circumstances which
would have to be considered. If
you are driving your own car and
it is stopped and drugs are found
even though you did not put them
in the car, you must give
permission before the car can be
searched. Also, once your car is
empounded in connection with a
drug charge, the police do not
have to return the car.
A question came up concerning
arrests by a private citizen. Mr.
Myerberg said that a private
citizen can make an arrest but he
is taking a chance of possibly
getting hurt by the person being
arrested, and felt that this was not
advisable.
Asked about arrest warrants in
St. Mary’s County, he said that
they are free of charge. He said
that warrants may be of any
length, and can contain as many
names as are necessary.
After this Mr. Myerberg
thanked everyone for being
present at the meeting.
The next speaker in the drug
series will be John Moorman, on
March 10th, in St. Mary’s Hall.
This report should be
considered as a general discussion
of the law, and should not be
deemed as definite authority to
follow in any subject manner in
ascertaining one’s rights in any
particular situation.
UNCLASSIFIED ADD
St. Mary’s College of Maryland
has been cited as high in the
nation in per-capita use of drugs.
Has it ever occured to you that
the police know this too? It is
reasonable to at least believe that
the law can and will
BUST
this place eventually. (Perhaps
sooner than you think!)
An Informed Student
4

PAGE 6 THE POINT NEWS March 9, 1971
Myerberg on
Drugs
On February 25th, Lawyer
Neal Myerberg spoke on drugs and
the law. This was under the
sponsorship of the drug
information program.
Mr. Myerberg began by saying
that he was looking at the drug
issue from the point of handling
drug cases and not as a drug user.
He said that the worst part in
handling drug cases was seeing
kids get busted because he could
not do much about it. He said
that even if the lawyer argues with
the judge that this is the person’s
first offense, the penalty is still
two years. He then stated that
“Most of the drug laws passed by
congress do not affect the
individual drug user.” Most of the
laws affecting individuals are state
laws. He pointed out that before
July 1, 1970, everything in
Maryland was two years and no
less. This penalty applied to
marijuana and hard drugs. Now,
however, possession of marijuana
in Maryland is a misdemeanor
with a penalty of one year and the
possibility of probation. But if
you give the drug to someone else,
you can be arrested for possession
and resale, which is a felony.
You cannot be arrested for a
mesdemeanor unless the police are
present, or if a warrent is used.
However, for a felony, one can be
arrested if the police believe and
have proof that the felony has
been committed.
It was stated that you can be
arrested if drugs are near you even
though you have no intent of
using them. He sited a case. Two
men were playing dise in an alley
and a bag containing drugs was in
the corner of the alley. The police
saw the men and arrested them
for'possession of drugs. He stated
that someoneated that someone
charged for possession of
marijuana as a first offense, is
entitled to probation in Maryland.
He said that each court can make
its own decision on a drug case,
and each county is allowed to
make a different decision.
Next he covered drugs and
their relationship to the federal
law. He said that the first law
concerning drugs went back to
1937 when Mayor Fiorello
Laguardia of New York had a law
passed that anyone possessing
marijuana must possess a tax
stamp. Mr. Myerberg wondered
who would have a tax stamp for
something which violates the law.
He said that as a new drug comes
into use, a law is passed against it.
He then explained the
differences between a felony and
a misdemeanor. He said that a
felony goes back to English
common law, and is punishable
either by imprisonment or death.
If a person commits a felony he is
unable to vote, obtain a passport,
and testify in court. He said that a
misdemeanor is anything that is
not a felony, but it still results in
a criminal record. With a
misdemeanor the rites of
citizenship lost for a felony do
not apply. He also said that if you
are arrested on a drug charge, you
are not wanted by the military.
Next, he covered some aspects
of drug treatment. In the 1950’s
those who were rehabilitated for
durgs were sent to the U.S. Public
Health Hsopital at Lexington,
Kentucky. At that time not many
young people were effectively
rehabilitated. They stayed at the
hospital for six weeks and then
sent home. The ones who were
considered drug addicts and were
supposedly rehabilitated, were the
older people. More often than
not, their rehabilitation was short
lived.
Concerning the legality of
marijuana, the courts say that it is
not legal, and will not listen to the
argument that it hurts no one. He
explained that three United States
constitutional amendments relate
to drugs. These are the first,
fourth and fifth. The first relates
to drugs and their right in a
religious ceremony. He said that
an Indian tribe had been using
drugs in a ceremony for
sometime. When the case came to
court, the tribe had enough
backing to show what they used
had a proper place in the
ceremony. The court stated that
they had a right to use drugs.
However, when Timothy Leary
started a church in California, the
court held that he did not have
the legal right to sue drugs in a
religious ceremony. The fourth
amendment dealt with search and
seizure. He stated that no one can
be arrested without a warrent,
except where the crime is being
committed in the presence or view
of the arresting officer. He said
that if the police seek to search
you for drugs, they cannot do so
unless you let them. However,
once the search is permitted it
becomes valid. He said that if
your car is stopped for a traffic
violation, you can be searched for
a weapon, and the officer may
examine areas in his presence and
view. Also, if he wants to search
the car, you must give him
permission, unless the search is
incident to arrest.
If the police suspect drugs in
a dormitory room and one of the
occupants refuses, provided both
are present, the search is not valid.
However, if one of the parties is
not present, and the other
consents to the search, it becomes
valid. If the search takes place in
your home and in your room, its
validity depends upon your
permission. In Mr. Myerberg’s
opinion, “A person has use of his
constitutional rights, and that no
parent could go against their own
children concerning constitutional
amendments.”
He said that the fifth
amendment deals with a person’s
testifying against himself in court.
He said that a person does not
have to testify against himself if
he does not want to, and he does
not have to testify against other
people. A common statement is
that “ I do not wish to testify on
the grounds that it may
incriminate me.”
Concerning the stop and frisk
law, the officer can only search
your person, and only if he
believes that you are in possession
of a weapon concealed for use
against him.
He then mentioned that most
of the supreme court decisions do
not aid the criminal, and people
who feel so are mis-informed. He
said that most of the criminals in
such cases are retried and
reconvicted. He then mentioned
that the D.C. Crime Bill with its
no-knock provision, which means
that police can enter a place
without an identifying knock on
the door and begin searching
where they can show that the
evidence would otherwise be
TOEHOLD Need a Sympathetic Listener ?
A new service was initiated in
St. Mary’s County approximately
three weeks ago, known as
Operation Toehold. Toehold is a
telephone crisis intervention
program established mainly to
help the teenagers of St. Mary’s
County, but by no means is it
limited to one age group. The
program is sponsored by the Drug
Action Committee of St. Mary’s
County, although the calls
received have touched on a wide
range of subjects. Anyone in need
of help, in need of someone to
talk with should call Operation
Toehold at 863-4653. At present
the hours are from 6 p.m.- 12 a.m.
on Mondays - Thursdays, from 6
p.m. - after midnight on Fridays
and from 12 p.m. Saturday to
midnight Sunday. The goal is to
establish a 24 hour-a-day, 7 day a
week service.
The telephones at Toehold are
manned by volunteers. These
people are trained by a few
persons with professional
experience answering the phones
and are taught several rules they
must abide by to remain on the
phones. Rule number 1: ALL
CALLS ARE KEPT STRICTLY
CONFIDENTIAL. The “ training”
sessions are held every Tuesday
and Thursday night at 7 p.m at
the Felix Johnson Educational
Center across from Foodland and
Ben Franklin in Lexington Park.
Anyone interested in joining the
program is urged to attend these
meetings or to call Mr. Kreitzer at
863-8174. The program is
directed and manned by a group
of very concerned people; these
people care about others (they
show it by action not just talk.) If
you need help call. If you want to
help, go to one of the sessions.
The program needs the support
of the community.
Drug Rap By Moorman
Robert Moorman, a former
associate of Dr. Timothy Leary
and a drug dependent himself for
six years, will be speaking in St.
Mary’s Hall on March 10, at 8:30
p.m.
In 1961 Mr. Moorman went to
Cambridge, Mass., to begin his
college studies. It was there that
he was introduced to and started
using drugs, back when hippies
were called beatniks. It was not
long after he had started college
that Mr. Moorman “ dropped
out.”
During the next six years, Mr.
Moorman experimented with
marijuana (extensive use),
morphine and heroine (eight
months addiction), L.S.D. and
mescaline (four years off and on),
amphetamines (five years off and
on), solvents and glues (limited
use), romalar (limited use),
barbiturates (limited use), and
various assorted pills from time to
time.
The end of the road for the
ROBERT MOORMAN
a different view on drugs compared
to Myerberg
drug dependent Robert Moorman
came in 1966 when he was
arrested in Tampa, Florida for
grand larceny and possession of
narcotics. For fourteen months,
confined behind the fences of the
Florida State and County Prison
System, Robert Moorman began a
most painful and agonizing
rehabilitation.
After Mr. Moorman’s release
from prison, a whole new world
opened to him again, one that he
had not known for six long years.
For the past two years, Mr.
Moorman has lectured at high
schools, preparatory schools,
colleges and universities from
coast-to-coast. As in his previous
lectures, Mr. Moorman is expected
to bring to our community a
fresh, sincere and candid approach
to the mounting problem of drug
abuse.
There will be an informal rap
with Mr. Moorman at 3:00 p.m. in
the Guest Cottage.
destroyed, only applied to
Washington,D.C. and not to its
suburbs.
Mr. Myerberg stated that most
drug arrests occur through
informers. Most often the
informer is a good friend of the
person being arrested. If an
individual sells some “grass” to an
informer and he buys it, you can
be arrested for selling it to him.
You were not trapped by the
informer since you did not have
to sell him the bag, and he did not
have to buy it from you. The
theory relating to this case is the
entrapment theory and it does not
hold up in court.
Mr. Myerberg felt that the
older judges did not know how to
handle the drug problem
effectively. He said that the older
ones looked at drugs as a
punishment, and not from the
rehabilitative view. He felt that if
judges were between 30-35 years
of age, they would have a better
understanding of drugs and their
relationship to young people. He
explained that there are two latin
terms relating to drugs. One is
mala prohibita which means that
drugs are evil because they are
defined by soneone as evil; the
other is mala is which users in one
form or another in every
generation. He said that in this
generation heroine is sued as a
form of rebellion against
something but he did not say
what this something was. At this
point, Mr. Myerberg concluded his
talk, and a question and answer
period followed.
One question was concerned
with the possession of water
pipes, seringes, and other
paraphernalia, and the possibility
of arrest if the police suspect
drugs. Mr. Myerberg said that if
drugs are suspected that you can
be arrested.
A question arose concerning a
jury of one’s peers. Mr. Myerberg
felt that this should apply to
young people as well as to any
other group. He felt that a jury of
one’s peers would have a better
understanding of the situation, if
the peers were members of a
comparable socio-economic, age,
color, or religious group.
Concerning arrest warrants, Mr.
Myerberg felt that the warrant
must have a specific case, place,
and the name or names of the
individuals for the warrant.
Concerning arrest record, Mr.
Myerberg felt that arrest records
should not be kept running. That
is, if one has been arrested for a
previous of offenses but not
convicted, the arrest record
should be deleted and not be used
subsequently to establish any
prima facie case of criminal
tendency.
A question came up concerning
internal possession. Neal felt that
there was no law against it, but he
said that if a policeman saw you
popping pills for example, prior to
your swallowing them, you could
be arrested for possession of the
narcotics. He said that police dogs
are trained to sniff out drugs, and
they can be used to show
probable cause for arrest.
Another question was, “ If
police enter your room and you
throw the drugs out the window,
can you be arrested?” The answer
was, “ Yes, since there is usually a
policeman covering at ground
level and sees what is thrown out
the window.” “ If you are driving
another person’s car and you are
stopped and drugs are found, can
you be arrested?” Mr. Myerberg
was not sure, and it would depend
upon the circumstances which
would have to be considered. If
you are driving your own car and
it is stopped and drugs are found
even though you did not put them
in the car, you must give
permission before the car can be
searched. Also, once your car is
empounded in connection with a
drug charge, the police do not
have to return the car.
A question came up concerning
arrests by a private citizen. Mr.
Myerberg said that a private
citizen can make an arrest but he
is taking a chance of possibly
getting hurt by the person being
arrested, and felt that this was not
advisable.
Asked about arrest warrants in
St. Mary’s County, he said that
they are free of charge. He said
that warrants may be of any
length, and can contain as many
names as are necessary.
After this Mr. Myerberg
thanked everyone for being
present at the meeting.
The next speaker in the drug
series will be John Moorman, on
March 10th, in St. Mary’s Hall.
This report should be
considered as a general discussion
of the law, and should not be
deemed as definite authority to
follow in any subject manner in
ascertaining one’s rights in any
particular situation.
UNCLASSIFIED ADD
St. Mary’s College of Maryland
has been cited as high in the
nation in per-capita use of drugs.
Has it ever occured to you that
the police know this too? It is
reasonable to at least believe that
the law can and will
BUST
this place eventually. (Perhaps
sooner than you think!)
An Informed Student
4